NOTICE: ON APRIL 30th 2014 THE CBR FORUMS WERE RESET AND ALL USER ACCOUNTS WERE CLOSED. TO JOIN THE NEW CBR FORUMS ALL PREVIOUS USERS NEED TO RE-REGISTER. All users, both new and returning, are expected to follow the CBR COMMUNITY STANDARDS & RULES.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Just finished the Donner commentary on S II. Ironically, he compared the restaurant scene to the scene in "Bronco Billy" where the Sheriff humiliates Billy and Billy never goes back and confronts him at the end for revenge. Donner states that he never forgave Eastwood for not having Billy go back and get even.

I say "ironic" because I have also compared the two movies. Except I remember that Clint Eastwood said the studio put tremendous pressure on him to put in a scene at the end where he goes back and gets revenge and he would not do it because it would be petty revenge and people who wanted the character to do that simply did not understand the character that was Bronco Billy.

I remember a friend of mine in college hated the restaurant scene because as he put it, "The only believable motive for doing that was revenge and Superman's not about revenge".

I'm not going to say that, at that point, Donner doesn't understand Superman in those petty revenge scenes. I'm just going to snarkily imply it.

Last edited by Powerboy; 02-13-2018 at 06:36 PM.

Superman was a beacon to the world. He didnít just save people, he made them see the best part of themselves.

Just finished the Donner commentary on S II. Ironically, he compared the restaurant scene to the scene in "Bronco Billy" where the Sheriff humiliates Billy and Billy never goes back and confronts him at the end for revenge. Donner states that he never forgave Eastwood for not having Billy go back and get even.

I say "ironic" because I have also compared the two movies. Except I remember that Clint Eastwood said the studio put tremendous pressure on him to put in a scene at the end where he goes back and gets revenge and he would not do it because it would be petty revenge and people who wanted the character to do that simply did not understand the character that was Bronco Billy.

I remember a friend of mine in college hated the restaurant scene because as he put it, "The only believable motive for doing that was revenge and Superman's not about revenge".

I'm not going to say that, at that point, Donner doesn't understand Superman in those petty revenge scenes. I'm just going to snarkily imply it.

Yeah, that was my read too. Superman BECAME a bully in that scene just because he wanted payback.

I never knew this before but it seems, in the original intent, when Superman pushed the first missile up into space, it's explosion was what freed Zod. Superman would then save Lois before she was killed and then capture Luthor. The second movie would be the one where he turned back time because he couldn't beat all three of the Kryptonians. I knew the last part but never knew it was supposed to be the missile.

It was supposed to be that, at the end of the first movie, we would see the explosion and their release - which would then tie into the warning given in the second movie about only a nuclear explosion being able to breach the Phantom Zone (said (missile) explosion then being replaced by the bomb in the Eiffel Tower elevator).

The audience was supposed to seem the Zoners released and headed for Earth, and a 'to be continued' type of ending telling us that Superman would be returning the following year.

Special Edition/ Richard Donner cut for me too. It also has the scene where AI Jor-El says that, were it not for the vanity of his people, he would have held his son in his arms and Superman reaches out to the AI suddenly realizing he is responding emotionally to what is really a highly sophisticated but presumably non-sentient computer program indicating how lonely he is.

One of the things I liked about Man of Steel was the Jor-Conscience (although I have a hard time accepting that Jor would do that for himself and not for Lara, but still... ). The holograms in Superman and Superman II were recordings - Jor-El anticipated Kal's questions and provided answers accordingly (a sort of 'omniscient' element bundled with 'predestination'). That's most apparent in Superman II when Lex finds the Fortress (Lex's 'no possibility for parole' is answered with an 'I wish you didn't ask me that' by Lara and Lex saying he didn't ask her anything bit).

The Jor-Conscience in Man of Steelwas Jor-El - it was everything about him (all his memories etc) in 'digital' form. (They could have played that forward with Henshaw or something a few movies down the line, or have a clash with Brainiac... so much potential).

Yeah, that was my read too. Superman BECAME a bully in that scene just because he wanted payback.

That wasn't my read. Superman is about righting wrongs, facing up to bullies. I felt it was clear the guy was abusive beyond his previous encounter with Clark but to others and the diner staff. Clark knew he needed an attitude adjustment. I think that was Donner really evidencing he remembered Golden Age Superman and that aspect.

That wasn't my read. Superman is about righting wrongs, facing up to bullies. I felt it was clear the guy was abusive beyond his previous encounter with Clark but to others and the diner staff. Clark knew he needed an attitude adjustment. I think that was Donner really evidencing he remembered Golden Age Superman and that aspect.

That's generally how I have viewed that scene, too, but I can understand how others would come to the bully-conclusion. He didn't need to do all that damage, though (even if he did pay for it) - but there may have been some sort of underlying memory of what had happened before, otherwise Clark telling them he had been working out is out of place, methinks.

One of the things I liked about Man of Steel was the Jor-Conscience (although I have a hard time accepting that Jor would do that for himself and not for Lara, but still... ). The holograms in Superman and Superman II were recordings - Jor-El anticipated Kal's questions and provided answers accordingly (a sort of 'omniscient' element bundled with 'predestination'). That's most apparent in Superman II when Lex finds the Fortress (Lex's 'no possibility for parole' is answered with an 'I wish you didn't ask me that' by Lara and Lex saying he didn't ask her anything bit).

The Jor-Conscience in Man of Steelwas Jor-El - it was everything about him (all his memories etc) in 'digital' form. (They could have played that forward with Henshaw or something a few movies down the line, or have a clash with Brainiac... so much potential).

Yes the Brando AI Jor-El is kind of either inconsistent or hard to believe. At times, it seems as if Jor had months or even years to know what was coming and spent every moment recording answers to every question Kal could possibly ask. It would make much more sense that it simply had a learning program and could adapt. I found it hard to believe that it didn't know that it was someone else and not Kal when Luthor was talking to it.

So, yes, both "Smallville" and "Man of Steel" represent decades of thinking it out and having a more advanced concept of what AI Jor really is.

Superman was a beacon to the world. He didnít just save people, he made them see the best part of themselves.

That's generally how I have viewed that scene, too, but I can understand how others would come to the bully-conclusion. He didn't need to do all that damage, though (even if he did pay for it) - but there may have been some sort of underlying memory of what had happened before, otherwise Clark telling them he had been working out is out of place, methinks.

Other interpretations are certainly valid. But everyone there clearly remembers the previous fight. "I've been working out" as a pseudo-explanation for how he is suddenly so much tougher. Typical time travel screwup. Kind of reminds me of a "Hercules" episode where Hercules goes back in time and erases a previous event from ever happening and then, in yet another later episode, someone refers to the event that never happened.

Combined with crushing Zod's hand, I think maybe the Golden Age Superman was emerging a bit in Donner's mind which is kind of mixed signals because he's been pretty solidly the Silver Age Superman until the last few minutes of the second movie. Though I still don't really buy it. The one and only person he does that too just happens to be the guy who beat him up when he didn't have his powers.

Superman was a beacon to the world. He didnít just save people, he made them see the best part of themselves.

Superman could be vindictive in the comics. Steve Lombard was constantly pulling mean pranks on Clark. And then Clark would get him back surreptitiously--which was some passive-aggressive conduct, since Steve would have no way of knowing this was payback for what he'd done to Clark earlier.

However, there was never any real damage to Steve--and it was funny enough to see the guy get his comeuppance. Whereas, the scene in SUPERMAN II doesn't sit well with me--Clark is a bully. If something is funny then it's worth the contortion of logic--but that scene wasn't funny enough for me to forgive it.

Superman could be vindictive in the comics. Steve Lombard was constantly pulling mean pranks on Clark. And then Clark would get him back surreptitiously--which was some passive-aggressive conduct, since Steve would have no way of knowing this was payback for what he'd done to Clark earlier.

However, there was never any real damage to Steve--and it was funny enough to see the guy get his comeuppance. Whereas, the scene in SUPERMAN II doesn't sit well with me--Clark is a bully. If something is funny then it's worth the contortion of logic--but that scene wasn't funny enough for me to forgive it.

I've actually never been too bothered by the second confrontation with the trucker in SUPERMAN II because considering Clark's power, he went *really* easy on the guy. The trucker was dazed and would probably wake up with a headache and a broken hand, but was otherwise intact. Maybe he learned something from the experience. If the guy mended his ways after that second encounter with Clark (admittedly, something we never got to see in the films), it would have been worth it.

I kind of wanted to see that guy show up again in SUPERMAN III or SUPERMAN IV and meet up with Clark again, having turned over a new leaf...maybe becoming a friend of Clark's and big Superman fan, kind of like Bibbo in the comics.

I don't know why, but the diner scene never bothered me. I don't think it makes Clark a bully to give an actual bully his comeuppance, a person who has most likely harassed other people at that diner over the years.

Yea, and Clark "spoke" in the language this bully understood, a public display and a moment he won't soon forget. Nor the diner staff or anyone that can remind him.

Originally Posted by Last Son

I don't know why, but the diner scene never bothered me. I don't think it makes Clark a bully to give an actual bully his comeuppance, a person who has most likely harassed other people at that diner over the years.

Yeah, and if the bully trucker reappeared in later SUPERMAN films as a changed man who demonstrated latent kindness and heroism, it would have really driven home the idea that encounters with Superman (even ones wherein one gets knocked silly) result in people growing to become the best versions of themselves. Missed opportunity here. Instead of a lingering controversy of whether Clark was being a bully himself, we could have had the setup for a powerful statement that Superman's innate goodness is contagious.

Yeah, and if the bully trucker reappeared in later SUPERMAN films as a changed man who demonstrated latent kindness and heroism, it would have really driven home the idea that encounters with Superman (even ones wherein one gets knocked silly) result in people growing to become the best versions of themselves. Missed opportunity here. Instead of a lingering controversy of whether Clark was being a bully himself, we could have had the setup for a powerful statement that Superman's innate goodness is contagious.

Buried Alien (The Fastest Post Alive!)

Sort of a Biff Tannen effect at least, where the bully begins to think twice about picking on people. Oh well, it was the last Donner Superman movie and only half of one at that, so I wouldn't have expected Lester or anyone else to reference that scene in a later movie.

Yea, and Clark "spoke" in the language this bully understood, a public display and a moment he won't soon forget. Nor the diner staff or anyone that can remind him.

Was this the first time that guy had lost a fight? I suspect not. It's like Clint Eastwood said, it's a very petty sort of revenge. And while he probably won't forget it, he most likely didn't change because of it.